Alternating Custody Awarded But Court Needs to Issue Fact Findings in Tennessee Custody Case

Tennessee child custody case summary in family law.

In re: Noah J.  – Tennessee alternating primary residential parent designation

The mother and father began dating in 2012 when the mother was 20 and the father was 29, and the mother soon became pregnant.  She moved into the father’s apartment in 2012 and gave birth to their son in 2013.  The father acknowledged paternity and is listed as the father on the birth certificate.

Their relationship was stormy, and each accused the other of physical abuse.  The police were called on numerous occasions, and after a particularly heated argument, the father moved out and in with his parents when the son was three months old.  The father then filed a petition for custody and visitation, and asked to be named primary residential parent.  The mother filed a counter petition asking her to be named as primary residential parent.

A juvenile court magistrate heard the case in 2014 and recommended joint custody, with the mother named primary residential parent in even years, and the father primary residential parent in odd years.  The other parent was awarded parenting time on alternating weekends, during the summer, and certain holidays.

The mother requested a rehearing, which was held.  The father admitted a long history of alcohol abuse, including five DUI’s, and a guilty plea to domestic assault.  But he argued that this was all in the past and that he had cleaned up his act prior to his relationship with the mother.  The father’s employer testified that he was a model employee as restaurant manager.

The mother, however, testified that he routinely came home visibly drunk, even after the child’s birth. She also alleged that he had cheated on drug and alcohol screens.

After hearing all of the evidence, the trial court rejected the magistrate’s recommendation, and instead granted “custody” to the mother, with the father having only supervised visitation.  The mother was also awarded over $35,000 in attorney’s fees.  The father then appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals.

The father’s first argument was that the lower court had not made detailed findings of fact, and the appeals court agreed.  The lower court had stated only that upon hearing the evidence, it had made its decision.  But there were no detailed findings of fact or an explanation of which factors the trial court had considered to be most important.  The appeals court quoted an earlier decision in which it had held that simply stating the court’s decision, without more, does not meet the standard of finding the facts specially.

The appeals court noted that the standard of review was abuse of discretion, and without detailed findings, there was no way to determine whether the lower court had acted within its discretion.

For this reason, the Court of Appeals vacated the judgment and remanded the case back to the lower court for further proceedings.

No. W2014-01778-COA-R3-JV (Tenn. Ct. App. Mar. 23, 2015).

See original opinion for exact language.  Legal citations omitted.

To learn more, see Child Custody Laws in Tennessee.